During the COVID-19 pandemic, distance learning became the predominant teaching method at most universities, exposing students and teachers alike to novel and unexpected challenges and learning opportunities. Our study is situated in the context of higher physics education at a large Swedish university and adopts a mixed-methods approach to explore how students perceive shifts to distance learning. Quantitative student survey responses comparing distance learning during the pandemic with previous in-person learning are analyzed with k-means cluster analysis and with a random-intercept multilevel linear model. Combined analyses produce a consistent picture of students who report having experienced the greatest challenges. They are on average younger, report being less autonomous in their learning, and find it harder than peers to ask questions to the instructor. They are also less likely to have access to a place where they can study without interruptions. Variation across courses is small with students being largely subjected to the same set of challenges. Qualitative data from semi-structured focus group interviews and open-ended questions supports these findings, provides a deeper understanding of the struggles, and reveals possibilities for future interventions. Students report an overall collapse of structure in their learning that takes place along multiple dimensions. Our findings highlight a fundamental role played by informal peer-to-peer and student-instructor interactions, and by the exchange of what we refer to as “structural information.” We discuss implications for teachers and institutions regarding the possibility of providing support structures, such as study spaces, as well as fostering student autonomy.
Teaching quality improvements frequently focus upon the ‘development’ of individual academics in higher education. However, research also shows that the academics’ context has considerable influence upon their practices. This study examines the working environments of teachers on an online pharmacy programme, investigating contextual conditions that facilitate or impede academic change and development. Interview data and institutional policy documents are examined within a Cultural-Historical Activity Theory framework. Distinct differences in the teachers’ sociocultural context were identified as influencing change and development. Departmental teaching cultures and patterns of communication influenced practice both positively, by offering collegial support, and negatively by impeding change. The findings have significance for academic development strategies. They suggest that departmental-level support should include communicative pathways that promote reflection upon and development of conceptions of teaching and learning.
Contradictory values in the Swedish doctoral education system are analysed through an interview and survey study of different academic disciplines: female-dominated, mixed and male-dominated. The focus is directed towards how the selected disciplines conduct application and selection processes in doctoral education and special attention is given to values regarding doctoral ideals, what a successful thesis should be like, how gender balance or imbalance is explained, and how activities aiming at gender equality are carried out. In the findings of this study, some specific patterns that show gendered discipline cultures in relation to doctoral education are apparent. The analysis shows an unclear or ambivalent view on gender and gender equality work in doctoral educations. In many of the issues investigated, essentialist views on gender emerge and a focus on gender differences is evident. The implicit assumption is that men and women are different and contribute to the discipline in disparate ways. The effectiveness of genderspecific doctoral strategies and to what extent gender equality work is viewed as a support strategy for women only, is discussed.
Internationalisation is a dominant policy discourse in the field of higher education today, driven by an assemblage of economic, social and educational concerns. It is often presented as an ideologically neutral, coherent, disembodied, knowledge-driven policy intervention—an unconditional good. Mobility is one of the key mechanisms through which internationalisation occurs, and is perceived as a major form of professional and identity capital in the academic labour market. Yet, questions remain about whether opportunity structures for mobility are unevenly distributed among different social groups and geopolitical spaces. While research studies and statistical data are freely available about the flows of international students, there is far less critical attention paid to the mobility of academics. Drawing on semi-structured interviews with 14 migrant academics from diverse ethnic backgrounds, including Roma and Latin American communities, and the theoretical framings of the new mobility paradigm and cognitive and epistemic justice, this article explores some of the hidden narratives of migrant academics’ engagements with mobility in the global knowledge economy. It concludes that there is a complex coagulation of opportunities and constraints. While there are many gains including transcultural learning, enhanced employability and inter-cultural competencies, there are also less romantic aspects to mobility including ‘otherness’, affective considerations such as isolation, and epistemic exclusions, raising questions about whose knowledge is circulating in the global academy.
Women are underrepresented in advanced positions in higher education in Europe. This study takes a horizontal perspective and focuses on the relationship between gender and discipline in order to combine research on gender in higher education with theories of disciplinary differences in academic cultures. The study points out substantial differences between disciplines in gender composition, specifically, the probability of a person leaving academia after earning a doctor's degree and various attitudes towards gender equality work. Our approach, which is based on quantitative longitudinal as well as qualitative research methods, has yielded a more complex and contradictory picture of gender equality in higher education than have vertical cross-sectional studies.